[Scanian]

It’s purely anecdotal but an anonymous conservative ran into Scalia at a cocktail party and asked him about the NBC issue. “I know,” Scalia supposedly said, “but it takes four.”

[Cicero]

Scalia said “It takes four.”

That’s just what I thought at the time. It takes four to put it on the docket, and then after the case is heard, it takes five to find against the defendent.

The critical thing was to get it on the docket. I wondered at the time which of the four conservatives refused to put it on the docket. Stevens, the swing vote, wouldn’t be needed until after the case was then heard.

[ExTexasRedhead]

Could be a one year-term and then impeachment!

[BuckeyeTexan]

IIRC, it was Orly Taitz who had that conversation with Scalia, but I think it was at a book signing or some other setting like that.

However, given her inability to accurately summarize a conversation, I don’t trust her version of the events. She butchered and completely misrepresented her interaction with Chief Justice Roberts.

[mojitojoe]

I’ve heard that before but I doubt the validity of the statement. I don’t think he would say something like that casually at a cocktail party and if he did, and he meant what he said, then we know our entire government is corrupt, all the way up to the Supreme Court.

[MHGinTN]

The pirate John Roberts has keelhauled the Constitution. He is not going to let some constitutional 'technicality' be run through his court which spurs riots and mayhem, because the pirate serves higher 'authorities'. Roberts prove he does not deign ethics to be relevent to him and his court when he entertained the affirmative action fraud while cases addressing the liar's eligibility were still pending at the SCOTUS. Roberts is a thoroughly amoral judicial goon. The democrats needed such a man to accomplish the coup they have installed. Despicable